Young kid who was probably not even born telling us that Buckley wasn’t best on ground. He took a team of hacks to 9 points from a flag against the best team of all time. He was the best on ground, Voss was second best but Buckley was not an undeserving winner by any chance.
Rigged ? That's a deceptive title. The commentator's choice might not be the same as that of the selectors , that doesn't justify Rigged which implies some sort of dishonesty.
Go back and watch the 2008 grand final. Stuart Dew had the best quarter, Hodge won the Norm Smith but Gary Ablett Jr was the best player on the ground. It’s not his fault his team couldn’t kick straight. Had the margin been a couple of goals closer (it was 26 points) he would have won the medal.
The 2016 Norm Smith medallist were the yellow maggots who umpired the match so much in the Bulldogs favour. Buckley was awarded the Norm Smith because nobody thought he would get to another grand final & they wanted him to win something.
@@kimberleyphilpot1035yes he probably does, but lm an otherwise neutral Victorian who was barracking for the doggies on the day, and good on them winning a flag after so long, but he’s not wrong about the umpiring. He’s just stating the obvious.
I really think it's important that you watch the matches in question. Stats never tell the whole story. In the case of the 2002 GF, it was obvious from the opening bounce that Brisbane were significantly better than Collingwood. They overran the Pies just about everywhere but Collingwood's tight defence was clinging on. Buckley was phenomenal that match. The fact you said Voss ought to have been second is another thing that makes me suspect you haven't watched it, cos if it wasn't Bucks then probably Anthony Rocca was next best on field. It's fair to say that the gap between Buckley and Rocca, and the rest of Collingwood, was cavernous, but those two were the reason that the Pies almost snatched it. Voss had one pretty good quarter (the last) but wasn't as good for the rest of the match. He wasn't bad, by any stretch he was grouse, but Buckley was better. Also... no way Houli was better than Dusty in that match. That's a bizarre take.
Had $200 on Frawley in the 2015 GF @$81 22 touches, 11 marks and kept JK to 0 goals. Still pissed off. And yeah, don't get me started on the Houli bet.
Doesn't matter what Cyril did or didn't do after half time coz the game was done and he was instrumental in setting that win up. Chants of "Cyril, Cyril, Cyril" echoed around the ground telling you exactly what Hawks fans felt. Stats aren't everything, especially with Cyril.
As a tigers stan I 100% agree with you but go even further to say he also arguably could have won it in 2020 against Geelong. I think because that's the only GF when we were losing at half time, the impact of Dusty kicking massive goals overshadowed the fact that for four quarters Houli kept the cats at bay - with a freaking torn calf!
Houli wasn't robbed it was the biggest misconception ever that people thought that, people just hated that Dusty won everything that year. Dustin had 29 disposals 22 contested, 2.2 and 2 goal assists & even set up Houli's goal.
Johannison got a lot of the ball but wasn’t that good with it, Boyd and Picken should have raffled it. Rioli might be the most damaging 12-possession player to have ever played and deserved his Norm Smith. The influence was off the charts. Simon Black over Akermanis in the 2003 was true robbery - 20 disposals and 5 goals trumps 39 possessions and 1 goal.
I’m a Richmond fan and think both Bachar and Dusty where almost equally as impressive wasn’t much between them. Maybe the difference was Dusty’s 2 goals
Yeah not quite an injustice, it could have gone either way and since dusty makes Houli look like an under 11’s player I’m glad dusty won his first of three.
check the 2017 stats mate, dusty had 22 contested possies from 29 and 2 goals and went at 83%effective as a pose to 25 at 75% 1 goal and only 6 contested. the math on this is simple. this is a big mistake
When awards are given where votes are accrued according to peoples' opinions you are always going to get a level of disagreement. While the comments you make are entirely valid they are nevertheless your opinion - admittedly based on some sound reasoning. The players who won the questionable medals did play pretty well just the same. Another excellent video Kaleen and one which does promote a degree of thought.
I really disagree with the term "rigged" used in this video. Voting on Norm Smith medals and brownlows is a subjective thing. They are NOT rigged, it's a difference of opinions with yours, that's all. For example, I'm a Geelong supporter and back in 2007, Steve Johnson won the Norm. No one questioned it at the time, but to be honest I thought Paul Chapman should have won it. There is always going to be differences on how people view a game. That doesn't mean it's rigged, grow up.
You left out Wayne Harmes,1979.Johnston,Francis and Fitzpatrick(rested whole 3rd quarter,costed him BOG) were superior that day but Wayne Harmes was Norm Smith's nephew.
Leon Baker should have won in 1984. It sounds like you haven't seen Grand Finals from the glory days,1977 to 1998,when players stayed in position and the flood which Rodney Eade instigated in 1996 but didn't start harming the game from 1999 to the present day.They are all available on YT for free.
Since when has the count of touches been the arbiter of the right to normie - it’s about influencing the game - Cyril not worthy? Go and watch the game and see who did what when the game was there to be decided.
Dumb video. You say that Cyril Rioli's 18 Disposal, 2 Goals performance shouldn't have enough to win but in the same video suggest Tom Boyds 14 Disposals, 0 Tackles should have. You have no idea what you are talking about
